Lawyer: Perry’s plans raise First Amendment, church-state issues

The Founding Fathers wouldn’t have been fans of Gov. Rick Perry’s official involvement with a Christian day of prayer, according to a presentation by First Amendment scholar David Furlow.

The Houston attorney quoted writings by early presidents Thomas Jefferson and James Madison that address prayer proclamations in particular, favoring a separation between a leader’s role in government and his personal faith.

“The best response (to Perry’s Christian prayer rally, The Response) is education,” Furlow told the 350-person crowd at the Jewish Community Center Tuesday. “Everyone here has the opportunity to educate their friends about the true history of our country and its struggle for religious freedom.”

While most agree the First Amendment’s freedom of speech and freedom of religion allow government officials like Perry to call, attend and participate in a Christian event, his use of government channels to promote the event is something to consider in the context of America’s tradition of church-state separation, Furlow posited.

“This is something we can learn from,” he said. “I am neither here to condemn nor condone, but merely consider.”

The evidence presented, though, did not support Perry’s official involvement as governor in such an event:

James Madison was hesitant over religious proclamations in particular, writing “I was always careful to make the Proclamations absolutely indiscriminate, and merely recommendatory; or rather mere designations of a day, on which all who thought proper might unite in consecrating it to religious purposes, according to their own faith & forms.”

Thomas Jefferson famously coined the phrase “wall of separation between Church & State” when describing the First Amendment to Baptists who asked if the president would dare “govern the Kingdom of Christ.”

The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, submitted by John Adams and ratified unanimously by Congress, said “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion….”

Organizers, on the other hand, position the event within America’s history observing days of prayer and fasting, as done by George Washington and others.

The First Amendment talk was sponsored by the Anti-Defamation League along with the Texas Freedom Network and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State.

Most attendees seemed opposed to — or at least concerned about — Perry’s involvement as governor in the upcoming prayer rally; they laughed when the rally was described as “apolitical” and chattered when Furlow showed the day of prayer announced on the state website and the official invitation printed on Perry’s gubernatorial stationery.

Official “’government speech’ is not supposed to favor any side on religion, said Mark Finkelstein, former ADL chair.

The ADL has called Perry’s event, sponsored by a Christian ministry and targeted at worshippers of Jesus, “misguided and inappropriate.”

Non-believers and Texans of other faiths see their leader and perhaps their tax dollars going toward an event that excludes them.

“I have no problem with a Christian governor being a Christian participant in a privately sponsored religious event that is open to public. I don’t believe that a governor loses his or her right to be who they are,” said Rabbi Stuart Federow, of Congregation Shaar Hashalom in Clear Lake. “My objection has to do with the problem of using a government website and government stationery and government support staff in the promotion of something that is exclusively Christian.”

Federow notes the event’s schedule, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. on a Saturday, keeps Jews from attending because they will be observing the Sabbath.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a request to find how many government resources were used in the organization of the event out of concern that the governor has been using his office to promote a sectarian agenda. Perry’s team responded in the story:

Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for the governor, noted that the AFA was paying for costs of the event and said no taxpayer dollars were being used. “Of course, his security detail will travel with the governor as they do everywhere he goes,” she said.

“Any time the ACLU is opposed to you, you must be doing something right,” said Eric Bearse, a former Perry aide and speechwriter involved with organizing the day of prayer and fasting.

Perry’s involvement with the event is unrelated to rumors of a presidential run, his role as governor or any other political interests and instead is purely a religious affair, Bearse has said.

It was Perry who turned this issue into a political one by using his public office to endorse a religious event which is contrary to the establishment clause of the First Amendment. No-one would have a problem if he attended such events as a private citizen, which is guaranteed in the free exercise clause. It’s not that difficult to understand.

Perry opened this can of worms. I, for one, believe it’s unconstitutional for public tax dollars to be used to promote a particular religion. And this is clearly a promotion of Christianity — the organizers admit it.

You’re “forgetting” that the main focus of this blog has been more about politics than religion. The Chronicle religion blogs reflect the Leftwing political agendas of this so-called newspaper. Like the “newspaper” which hosts it, it’s a political blog in disguise.

In 1797 Congress approved a treaty with Tripoli that had an Article 11 reading:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

The people of Whitetrashistan wouldn’t pass the exam required to become a naturalized citizen of the USA … as a matter of fact, that test ought to be required to anybody applying for a Voters Registration Card.

Dirty V….No need to apologise for being sorry. I forgot when Perry established a religion for Texans that procliamed they must worship christ, could you help me remmebr when he did that. The other guy, well I just threw him in because I like acting like a liberal and calling everyone who I disagree with racist.

@PerryWatch – I don’t “remmebr” Perry establishing Christianity in Texas, but I do know when he is planning on doing it (hint: 08/06/2011). For a sitting governor to endorse and actively promote a nonsecular pray-a-palooza is appalling and, quite frankly, disparaging to the Office of the Governor of the state of Texas.

unfortunately, Goldwinger2008, nowadays there’s virtually no difference among ‘that group’, whether you call them ”the right’, ‘conservatives’, or, to an extent, ‘Republicans’. religion really started to intrude into politics in the 50’s, when they altered the Pledge of Allegiance, put ‘In God We Trust’ on currency, and started the National Day of Prayer. it’s increased little by little since then, and exploded after 911.

nowadays you can’t be elected to a high office, especially President, unless you proclaim yourself a ‘Christian’, regardless of Article VI of the Constitution (“no religious test shall ever be required”). it’s never been codified into law, but it might as well be, if someone wants to be elected President or Governor.

and that’s only one example; school vouchers which enable some religious schools to indoctrinate children against science or critical thinking is another. and, here in Texas, there’s always the State Board of Education. the intrusion of religion continues there, although not quite as blatant as before.

it’s a definite danger to the State and the Republic, especially as some people wish to replace secular government with theocracy.

When you get a job writing for the Chronicle…,,you have to continuously prove your allegiance to Obama and your devotion to Marxist socialism. Kate will continuously harp on Perry’s Christian beliefs, but she’ll never write an article about Obama’s wacko pastor Jeremiah Wright, who justified the attacks on 9/11. She’ll go after how Perry is spending tax dollars for a prayer meeting, but she’ll never criticize the Obamas for spending over $1.4 million on their Hawaiian vacation last Christmas. What about the 40 aircraft he used to see India?? Kate Shellnut’s job description is blatantly clear, demonize the Christians and conservatives…..cover up for and campaign for the left,

Scott – I will write about what makes news in the religion realm, and right now, that’s Rick Perry. I don’t write about religious controversies that took places years ago because that’s not how a news website works.

I am not religious and I think Christians are nuts, but I have no problem with this. “Church” in the days of the founding fathers meant the governing body of the religious organization. “Church” is NOT the same thing as religion as we know it today. Also, the phrase “wall of separation” does NOT appear in the constitution. “Free exercise” of religion, and “no establishment” of religion is all it says. Endorsment or involvement in religion is a far cry from establishment in my opinion.

Further, the author undermines his argument with Jefferson’s Wall quote. Jefferson was promising to keep Government out of the lives of religious people, not religious people out of government.

In the War of Independence, the left sided with Britain. They had no place at the table during the creation of the Constitution, which is simply trying to tie the hands of the progressives/leftist. The left has been and always will be at war with the the US Constitution.

Neither do the terms “capitalist” or “free market”, but I bet you think that those are engrained by what does appear in the Constitution.

“Endorsment or involvement in religion is a far cry from establishment in my opinion.”

And so your opinion is flawed. “Establishment” goes two ways. An existing organization may be an establishment, but also laying the groundwork for something is an establishment of it, such as establishing a university. Whenever you institutionalize a framework, that could be called an establishmet of that framework. This is, in fact, why the Supreme Court has agreed more than once that endorsing any religion violates the establishment clause. The phrase “make no law with respect to…” means do not do anything that has to do with it. Stay out of it, it is not for government to do. It is a very, very small thing to ask someone to not use thier offical status for promotion of religion. Given that the AFA is engaged in a re-write history campaign to end church-state separation and establish Christianity as the Offical Religion, Perry knew full well that his action A) was violating his oath of office and B) would stir up the victim complex that is the life blood of the AFA.

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

The adoption of which predates the First Amendment by 2 years…

Let’s be clear here, most of the colonies were established by people running away from state-sponsored religion — and the boundaries of our states are a testiment to that continued tension as various Puritan and other Christian sects attempted at the state level to impose their religious beliefs through the power of the state.

Religious belief (and churches, formal & otherwise) flourishes in this country precisely because we have a separation — not of religious people from government service, but because we try to keep religious dogma from being enshrined in the civil apparatus of government.

You make an “A+” in correctly interpreting the Constitution Matt. The Founders never intended to muzzle religious liberty and what Perry is doing on Aug. 6th no way endorses any particular religion. Like it or not, this is still overwhelming a Christian nation, and while I personally don’t subscribe to any particular religion, I’d never object to anyone exercising their rights. Or call them some of the ugly names the “tolerant” left is so fond of using.

Matt, well said as far as you went. The vast majority of liberal respondents have no concept of the Bill of Rights. Those first 10 Amendments were to (a) ensure that no one set up a royalty in the U.S. and (b) to protect us from our government. The first Amendment use of the word “church” is in context with the Church of England, a Church established by the King and forced on the people. In that sense, “church” is not only the corporate body but the membership and church dogma. The “wall” that Jefferson wanted created was to prevent any leader in the U.S. from creating a church. Already the liberals and atheists are quibbling about sub processes associated with words, such as establish. The word “establish” is fairly clear in its meaning, both then and now. It means to, well, “establish” something. Something cannot be established unless its operational. Pouring household scraps in your backyard, for example, does not create a swine operation anymore than saying a prayer is the first step in establishing a church. I’ve already pointed out that President Madison, who the liberals first picked as the example of someone who didn’t want dirty old religion to be sanctioned by the government, called for a national day of prayer in July 1812 when the second war with England was going badly. The prayers must have worked because by the start of 1813, the tide was turning. But whether prayer works or not is unimportant as it relates to today’s topic. The first Amendment guarantees the right for ALL (and ALL still means all, just ask the writer of the 14th Amendment whose use of the term “ALL” resulted in anchor babies today) Americans to be free to worship without government interference. One assumes that Perry still falls in the “all” group.

sorry, wanting, but you are just as quibbly as the next guy. Establishment most certainly does not imply anything independantly operational, even if many examples of establishments do. A law may be established, a principle may be established, such as “all men are created equal”. It need only become institutional in that it becomes part of operations or even case law. Hence, when you allow a principle of religion to become a defacto policy, you have an establishment of religion in government. Because this clearly has the potential to infringe on those who do not share that religion, having no law (interpreted since as no act of government) respecting (having to do with, not being polite to) an establishment of religion nor the restricting the free exercise thereof effectively says twice, Don’t use government for anything religious. Article 6 effectively even says don’t make religion an issue in selecting

You have to look at all of the thought of the time to keep from getting too hung up on words. The fundamental idea behind the Revolution and the Constitution was the Social Contract. People have rights and the only authority of government is to protect those rights. The idea that Government could do anything divinely inspired was, in their eyes, thouroughly debunked by history, while they were all familiar with religious persecution sanctioned by government. Even the most pious and preachy among them tended to distrust using government to promote religion. While Washington may have said a public prayer in office, he also at one point argued against hiring chaplains for the Military because the government should not provide religion. He relented, and like a good politician publicly toed the line afterward. Folks are right that the founders probably did not expect that Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims and even Wiccans would be an issue (although they had a lot of atheist friends), but to think they would not understand that the same principles would apply, and even need to be stronger in interpretation to match the original intent is just to underestimate their convictions about the role of government.

So Gordon – just so I understand you correctly, your argument is that the “left” or “liberal/progressive” as you would term it would have nothing to do with the “conservative/status-quo” element of the American Revolution? Well, you are dead wrong and horrendously ignorant. Liberals like Adams, Madison, Washington, & Jefferson had quite enough of the conservative element and decided to kick those conservatives to the other side of the Atlantic. Listen less, read more you juvenile historian.

What expert would you be talking about from your article? Too many people that have no facts to back them up trying to say how someone hundreds of years ago would see a person of today. They are a horrible joke on society and are the reason that the children of today do not fair well against children of other countries.

You have heard of the invention called “books”? The founding fathers wrote many of them on their opinions of seperation of church and state and all you have to do is read them to see how they felt. Don’t look for these books in your Bible, you actually have to read a different book for a change.

@JohnA Sorry JohnA as for me all I need today is what is written in the bible..another book, maybe someday, probably not..The bible informs me that it has all the knowledge I’ll ever need..hence the reason why I would have no time for other books..That being said though, you would never have to worry about me showing any interest in using religion in the government or government in any form of religion….and that’s because the promises in the bible give me much more power than all the nations and their governments in all the earth…I begin with Psalm 110:1 …that is in itself enough…yet there is all the rest of the promises and I’m kind of greedy when it comes to God’s promises ..

William obviously can’t read. My comment very specifically said that the founding fathers wrote books about the seperation of church and state. Neither the Declaration of Independece or the Constitution are books.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Perry is a citizen and can go to any rally he wants. No issue here. Presidents go to church and have secret service agents accompany them. No one is crying about a church/state issue there. The Constitution says Congress will make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This in no way conflicts with Perry going to a rally.

Really, txloanguy? So, when Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin got up and started to speak about their religious belief known as “deism,” that is, the belief, based solely on reason, in the existence of God as the creator of the universe who, after setting it in motion abandoned it, assumed no control over life, exerted no influence on natural phenomena, and gave no supernatural revelation, do you think most of the fundamentalists would even recognize them as Christians? Or, more likely, would they shout them down as heretics and demand that they be removed from the stage? Those like you, who think things are now as they always were, just don’t understand history. You believe it says what you want it to say. And, when someone comes along and points out the beliefs of many of the founding fathers were very unlike what the fundamentalists or even mainstream Christians think today, you refuse to believe it because it is not consistent with your preconceived notions.

The idea that the founders would have problems with Perry’s participation in a day of prayer and fasting is utter nonsense.

George Washington issued this Proclamation: A National Thanksgiving on 3 Oct. 1789.

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and

Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:”

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation…

The proclamation goes on, but you get the point. Seems Congress asked Washington to do this…

Jefferson and others had reseervations about religion and the state but it is disingenuous and unscholarly to pretend they did not think the country was fouinded on judeo-christian principals and directly by and with the assistance of the divine creator…

But you will notice that Washingtin specifically avoided any Judeo-Christian imagery or terminology, and also simply “recommended” that the day be observed. Your extrapolation that he was accepting and acknowleging a Judeo-Christian basis for our government is beyond a stretch into fantasy.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

“Any time the ACLU is opposed to you, you must be doing something right,” said Eric Bearse, a former Perry aide and speechwriter involved with organizing the day of prayer and fasting.”

The ACLU has gone to bat for Christians. They even once defended Rush Limbaugh. And if Eric Bearse ever found himself in a situation in which his civil liberties were being blatantly denied, they would defend him.

Agreed. A statement like this should be a red flag to anyone who actually values freedom in America. The ACLU is always unpopular because the only rights that need to be defended are the unpopular ones, but there is no freedom when you can only do what is popular. Those like the AFA who feel that the Constitution is a “quaint document” that can be tossed asside by a simple majority vote (except when they are the minority) are the biggest threat to freedom, but they wrap themselves in the flag even as they try to stamp out civil liberties.

The ACLU has gone to bat for Christians far less than it has suppressed free expression of religion.
No one is going to excuse a bank robber because he may drop some money in a charity.
The ACLU has steadily become the arm of intolerance and suppression of free expression by Christians and arguing otherwise is to ignore their history.

Way to go Kate another article against Christian principles…. There are other people who do NOT reside on the left side of logic that would argue that your article is a sham…. If you would actually read for yourself writings of the Founding Fathers you might find out that your so called Constitutional Expert is not as much a expert as he portends to be….. Of course with all of your articles debasing Christianity I would not expect you or anyone of the LSMedia to actually do any real investigating reporting to find the actual truth to any story….

People with your views scare me because they can’t distinguish the difference between “debasing” their religion and simply insisting that it be kept separate from, and unestablished by, our government. No one wants to restrict how you exercise your 1st amendment rights outside of sponsoring establishment in the government, which is what Rick Perry is arguably doing.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

@DirtyV
And, of course, this is the entire focus of re-writing the history. Despite the fact that there is zero Biblical support for the notion that God’s commandments are to be imposed on non-believers, or that belief can be imposed, the AFA capitalizes on the four-year-old mentality that rules are rules, and there is no distinction between what you should do and what the law should mandate that you do, or what you should not do and what should be illegal. Listen ot the public discourse. When one is told that what they said is stupid, mean and factually incorrect, they claim that they are being censored, and they believe it, because they have no mental separation between society and government. If society is depraved, it is because government did not prevent it, in their logic. It therefore makes no difference if we have a Constitutionally seculalr government. If the founders prayed, they must have wanted government to establish religion after all. If some were Christian, they must have meant for the Ten Commandments to be our first Ten Laws. Show them a document where a founder says “But never by the use of government” and they will find three that say “thank God” and think that they won.

the founding fathers were a mixed bag of religious conviction. they were founding a nation and didn’t realize that 236 years later we would be living through its ruination. maybe furlow can concern himself with some of our problems rather than symptoms and help cure us.

Well, historical accuracy helps. The founding fathers have been co-opted by religious conservatives trying to rewrite history to make it seem like this country was founded as a christian nation. Sometimes, they feel generous and call it a judeo-christian nation. In fact, the framers of the Declaration and Constitution make very little reference to religion or a creator (the only time religion is mentioned in the Constitution is a clause that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States” (Art. VI, paragraph 3).

That’s it. No god, no Jesus, no creator. The First Amendment clarifies that government should stay out of this.

The Constitution was primarily written by James Madison, who was Anglican, but never confirmed and did not take communion, a hallmark of deists in that time (the same is true of Monroe and Washington). The Declaration was primarily written by Jefferson, who edited the bible to remove any reference to the divinity of Jesus. Franklin was a deist. John Adams and J.Q. Adams were unitarians, and did not believe in the holy trinity. Thomas Paine was as close to an atheist as anyone in the 18th century. Samuel Adams was an orthodox christian.

Now, do you really think these me would be sponsoring a christian prayer rally to the exclusion of other religions? Methinks that is not the only difference between these great men and Rick Perry.

They were not idiots. The fact that they were a mixed bag only supports that they valued the individual nature of religion and would not want the government to stick its nose in it. The notion that what we have today is “ruination” compared to what they had then is just nuts. People were dying of starvation, skirmishes along borders, being kidnapped on the high seas, people were losing their farms due to taxes (yes, taxes passed by the founders), not to mention that they had slaves (if you want to compare moral corruption, at least open your eyes). In all this, they knew that the Constitution was good for maybe 50 years, so they included an amendment process which could even be used to replace the Constitution. What they did not include was the option to simply ignore the constitution, although history is full of examples where Congress or a President did just that. When ignoring the Constitution is popular, it is often not corrected except by the courts, and then only if the courts perceive a harm or are willing to risk the popular backlash.

The sooner we rid ourselves of religion the better off our society will be. Religion is a form of mind control and suppression of thought and expression. Our society is failing by putting religion in front of critical thinking and education. Ignorance over reality will lose everytime as we are finding everyday. Remove religion from the equation and society will be unshackled to allow for free will to flourish.

REALLY! You actually believe that? If your argument were true, than why has the old Soviet Union disappeared? Why are they now actively encouraging religious participation? Did you know that they had the highest alcohol, suicide and domestic abuse rate in the world under the old atheistic dictatorship? The dissolution of the Soviet Union was not just about military might or economics, it was about the shackling of the human spirit, which you claim will be free when religion is gone. You have it backwards- atheism breeds Big Brother & the “1984” ORWELLIAN mentality. Any place or time in the world where religion is stifled (old Roman empire, modern day China, e.g.) is fertile ground for the planting of spiritual seeds. Good luck selling that hog…………………………………..

You cannot rid the Human mind of religion, even yours. There is absolutely no way more than 5% of what you believe to be rational is actually any less taken on authority and comfort than the beliefs of those who think are bizarre. What you believe is different, and the criteria you use are different, but the result, that most of what you believe is as poorly examined as the next guy, is not different. 1500 characters is not adequate to go into metaphysics, so a simple example may suffice:

You probably think that you are thinking right now, and that the processes involved in thought are all natural processes governed by the same physical laws as the rest of the universe. Now, try to prove that it is possible for you to drive your own thinking without dogmatic phrases like “self-evident” that mean nothing except “I can’t help but believe”. Think hard and don’t just rattle off definitions, and you will see that you have a self-sustained worldview much like anyone else.

Your religion is just one, like Buddhism, perhaps, that does not subscribe to divinity, but that does have its own dogma, including “this is not a dogma”. The fact that you update your beliefs does not really differentiate you from others, because everybody, even fundamentalists, do as well, they just describe it differently.

Your position, therefore, is the same as theirs. You don’t want to rid the world of religion, just of “those false religions” that lead us to ruin.

The Separation of Church and State combined with Religious Freedom of individuals is essential for any search for truth, even scientific truth.

Actually Dan, if you had truly read and understood ‘1984’, you would know that ‘Big Brother’ was developed from the religious concept of control and that is how BB took over and succeeded. The sheeple always ‘need’ a leader — substitution for the mind.

Why throw the blame on Democrats for ruining the country? The country was in a downfall when the former President Bush stepped down. Point the finger at the individuals that created this MESS and it was not the DEMOCRATS. Everyone needs to expedite their voting rights in November. Perry is the reason for the turmoil of the Texas schools. Perry refused to accept the stimulus money which resulted to many of the Texas educators to be jobless NOW.

Absolute garbage. Bush’s tax cuts to RETURN A BUDGET SURPLUS are the PRIMARY component of the deficit. They should NEVER have been extended. Two unbudgeted wars did most of the rest. ‘Obamacare’ is deficit neutral or slightly deficit reducing, according to the CBO. The ‘failed’ stimulus is a very small part of the deficit.

What do people think drastic cuts in spending is going to do? Create jobs? Big spending cuts is going to include a lot of LAYOFFS.

The quotes from Jefferson, Madison and Adams are why Texas religious fanatics want to excise them from Texas classrooms and replace the real history of America with the fiction that the Founding Fathers intended to create a Christian theocracy.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

I’m no fan of Gov. Perry, but it appears to me that the Houston Chronicle goes out of it’s way to actively campaign AGAINST him. Newspapers are supposed to be non-biased when reporting news and let the readers make up their own minds.

Mrs. Shellnut. I’m sure no one would mind if during the Prayer-a-thon, you set up a table outside the facility and tried to sell some Chronicles. It couldn’t hurt. Monday and Tuesday editions now seem smaller than the Greensheet.
Love your work and good luck!
Monty

In a recent interview with the New Hampshire Union Leader, Governor Rick Perry reiterated his support for the Texas DREAM Act, a bill he signed in 2001. The bill signed by Governor Perry allows illegal aliens who have lived in Texas for three years to receive in-state tuition. Due to the Texas DREAM Act, qualifying illegal aliens attending the University of Texas, for example, pay $10,000 less in tuition costs, an amount that is thrown on the backs of taxpaying citizens in Texas.

In 1996, Representative Lamar Smith of Texas authored the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Rep. Smith’s bill clearly prohibits states from offering in-state tuition benefits for illegal aliens, unless offered to all U.S. citizens and legal immigrants as well.

To be honest, illegal alien residents of Texas ARE Texas taxpayers. Texas is funded entirely on sales, use, and property taxes. Anyone who lives in a residence here pays property tax (either directly or indirectly through rent). Anyone who buys things retail pays sales tax. You have a bigger gripe in a state with an income tax.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

SERIOUSLY??? Our founding fathers INSURED that NOBODY would be persecuted for religious beliefs! Our country was formed by those who were escaping from religious persecutions! I find it hard to believe that this guy is an expert. The separation of church and state was brought about BECAUSE the Church of England was run and inforced by the King of England. Thomas Jefferson said, “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.” Look at the history of Europe and see how many wars there were concerning religious beliefs. People were killed because of their religious beliefs. But our founding fathers gave these people HOPE to live in freedom from these persecutions. Look at American history and you will find many Revolutionary War heroes who started churches after the war in their home towns because they had finally achieved the religious freedom to do so! If anything, our founding fathers would SUPPORT Perry in this effort! They fought for our FREEDOMS including religious freedoms. Another quote by Jefferson, “We have solved, by fair experiment, the great and interesting question whether freedom of religion is compatible with order in government and obedience to the laws. And we have experienced the quiet as well as the comfort which results from leaving every one to profess freely and openly those principles of religion which are the inductions of his own reason and the serious convictions of his own inquiries.”

As a Christian, it has ALWAYS been known to speak out – not HIDE your beliefs. Perry is exercising his FREEDOM to speak out about his religion! And the liberals are once again trying to STOP religion in America!

But then, according to the liberals, it is PERFECTLY okay to take away the second amendment!

” Look at the history of Europe and see how many wars there were concerning religious beliefs. People were killed because of their religious beliefs.”
==========

People were killed in the American colonies for their religious beliefs too. Colonies like Virginia and Massachusetts had the death penalty on their books for practicing the “wrong” religion (like Quakerism). Other colonies banned the practitioners of “wrong” religion (i.e. Catholics) from running for public office, practicing law, etc. In other words, the experiment of mixing church and state WAS tried here in America, it was a failure, and the Founders learned from those mistakes and set up a secular republic, which is the only way to insure religious liberty for EVERYONE.

Get an education first before posting. Read what the Founding Father had to say about what you posted:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

It cracks me up how you nut jobs go off on these wild unrelated overblown rants. NO ONE is saying Perry can’t go to the rally…
ALL they are saying is that he shouldn’t use an official government website and official government letterhead to do it!
What is it? You people can’t read or you can’t comprehend?

I have to say, yet again, because some Christians are unbelievably slow to learn – nobody is saying that Perry or any other Christian or person of another religion, should not be allowed to pray, and even to pray at a big public rally. What we are objecting to is his using his public office, his status as a public official, his official web site, and his official stationery, to promote a Christian event. Hello? Are any of you listening?

I am going to attend, just because of all the hand wringing and media uproar. I’m sure it will be much ado about nothing, just like the alleged “groping” by the TSA. I recently opted out and during the patdown I remember telling the TSA person, “is this what all the hoopla has been about?” There was nothing to it like it was portrayed in the media.

There is a separation of church and state. Not one cent of the money Perry raises from this event should be allowed in his campaign war chest. These evangelic folks are nothing more than our version of the Taliban.

In fact if every time congress or the president thought about spending our money, they stopped and prayer a few minutes, we might not have the debt problem we have today. Then again, since they worship themselves, we might be even worse off.

For those who do not believe in prayer, this event should be benign and for those who do believe it should be beneficial. Where’s the problem?

The problem is if we don’t draw a line in the sand here, our freedoms will continue to be eroded by the pro-establishment religious zealots in this country. P.S. Planned Parenthood, stem cell research, and NPR/PBS are great things. Religion needs to get out of the way of progress.

Yeah, let’s cut funding to something that helps THOUSANDS of women, a fraction of which have to go through the terrible decision of the ever-so-‘evil’ abortion. News broadcasts that don’t hump everything that comes out of republicans’ mouths; TV programming that plays Sesame Street and does not promote the Jersey Shore; Medical research that has the potential to cure multiple things (by the way, when a cure comes from whatever it is your god has justly inflected upon you from stem cell research, I expect you to 100% decline the treatment due to the atrocity that was committed) /sarcasm for those that can’t tell…

I don’t know what happened to this fame seeker, but over the last two years, he truly went into the deep end. I take offense to Perry using God for his political gains. No one can convince me otherwise of his strategy.

The First Prayer in Congress September 7, 1774
The circumstances surrounding the Colonial and Revolutionary period were dramatic, fascinating and often ironic. Such is the case of one Reverend Jacob Duche’, who served as Rector of Christ Church in Philadelphia until 1777.
In September, 1774, Reverend Duche’ was approached to come and lead the First Continental Congress in prayer. The Congress was assembled to discuss the weighty matters that the Colonies faced as the tension with the English Parliament were pointing slowly and surely to separation and
revolution.
On September 7th, the Reverend went to Carpenter’s Hall, a two story brick building completed only one year earlier, to convene with the delegates. In that assembly he read Psalm 35, which speaks of the Lord as defender of righteousness against those who are wronged by injustice and oppression.
Obviously moved and emotional, Reverend Duche’ spontaneously dropped to his knees, followed almost immediately by many of those in attendance, and uttered the following prayer:
“O Lord our Heavenly Father, high and mighty King of kings, and Lord of lords, who dost from thy throne behold all the dwellers on earth and reignest with power supreme and uncontolled over all the Kingdoms, Empires and Governments; look down in mercy, we beseech thee, on these our American States, who have fled to thee from the rod of the oppressor and thrown themselves on Thy gracious protection, desiring to be henceforth
dependent only on Thee, to Thee have they appealed for the righteousness of their cause; to Thee do they now look up for that countenance and support, which Thou alone canst give; take them, therefore, Heavenly Father, under Thy nurturing care; give them wisdom in Council and valor in the field; defeat the malicious designs of our cruel adversaries; convince them of the unrighteousness of their Cause and if they persist in their sanguinary
purposes, of own unerring justice, sounding in their hearts, constrain them to drop the weapons of war from their unnerved bands in the day of battle!
“Be Thou present, O God of wisdom, and direct the councils of this honorable assembly; enable them to settle things on the best and surest foundation. That the scene of blood may be speedily closed; that order, harmony and peace may be effectually restored, and truth and justice, religion and piety, prevail and flourish amongst The people. Preserve the
health of their bodies and vigor of their minds; shower down on them and the millions they here represent, such temporal blessings as Thou seest expedient for them in this world and crown them with everlasting glory in the world to come. All this we ask In the name and through the merits of Jesus Christ, Thy Son and our Savior. Amen.”
Oddly enough, there was opposition to the suggestion of prayer in congress because the assembly, composed of Episcopalians, Quakers, Anabaptists, Presbyterians and Congregationalists, was uncomfortable yielding to any one clergyman.
At this point, Samuel Adams took to his feet and proclaimed that “he was no Bigot, and could hear a Prayer from a Gentleman of Piety and Virtue, who was at the same time a friend to his country.

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Of course, a couple of notes are in order:
1) this was not the Congress of the United States of America, which did not exist prior to 1789, but the Continental Congress.
2) note that the issue of allowing ANY religion a foothold over others was of great concern amoung these folks.
3) This was not even an official declaration, just a ceremonial detail.
4) a decade and a half later, when most of the states had put church-state separation into their State constitutions, A major stumbling block in ratification of the U.S.Constitution was that it lacked sufficient Church-State separation as well as protection of all civil liberties.

Statesmen…may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is God and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our people in a great measure, than they have it now, they may change their rulers and forms of government, but they WILL NOT OBTAIN A LASTING LIBERTY~John Adams

Don’t know for sure if this is a fake quote or not, so I researched on website and found the following which seemed appropriate:

“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other. ”
John Adams (1735 – 1826)

“In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.”
John Adams (1735 – 1826)

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

Dan:
What exactly do you think that these quotes demonstrate? Certainly not that these men would for one second consider that it was the role of government to define standards of morality or to adopt official beliefs, because they also made it clear that they had no interest in government being allowed to make any religion official. He even says right in this quote that neigher the government nor the constitution can make people moral, that government is no good unless the people are moral on their own. Add to this his statements that America does not have a government based on Christianity, and it is much clearer.

I wish some of these so called EXPERTS would read the First Amendment. It DOES NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE… The THE FIRST AMENDMENT prohibits GOVERNMENT from ESTABLISHING A RELIGION and PROTECTS each person’s right to practice (or not practice) any faith without GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE.

Having a SITTING GOVERNOR and potential PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE host a rally sponsoring one particular religious sect/belief system constitutes ESTABLISHMENT of that particular religion. This is the problem/conflict with the 1st amendment.

Cotulla Cowboy:
I shudder to think what other gems lie in that mind: perhaps “The state law says absolutely nothing about ‘running’ red lights, only that you are required to stop if the light is red” perhaps.

Like it or not, WE paid for that stadium so it’s a public place. It does not belong to a religious group. If he wants to have his rally, go to any of the mega churches we have in Houston. Leave public places alone and do it on your own money.

From what I’m reading, it is indeed being done on someone else’s (not the public’s) money. And I would assume, unless you can show otherwise, that they are paying for the use of the stadium just like anyone else would do. The stadium managers have the right to rent it, or deny rental, to anyone they deem appropriate. If I don’t care for pro football, should I protest football being played there? What if I don’t like the rodeo, or someone who’s going to perform a concert there? Being a public place is irrelevant.

If the management of the Stadium rents it out to other groups, like the Houston Rodeo, etc, and the AFA gets the same terms, then you got nothin’

It does not good to throw nonsense into the discussion just because it sounds like it has some of the right words. You just make your side sound stupid. That is the job of the other side to sound stupid.

Like it or not, that stadium is being rented for this event, and the rentors can do as they please, within the bounds of the law. Harris County rents Reliant Stadium to many different parties & entities.

Do you ever do ANY research, before you launch into one of your fact-devoid diatribes? Your posts are classic “shoot first/ask questions later” commentary.

The “Evangelic Taliban” is going to ram their religious agenda down our throats whether we want it or not. Religion and politics must be kept separated. The people of this country have many different religious beliefs or disbeliefs and the few that feel they are chosen do not have the right to inflict their beliefs on the masses. Perry has no right to use his political power in any religious function and visa-versa.

Tsk Tsk. Whether you believe it or not, this is the best that could happen to Perry’s ‘exploratory’ venture toward vying for the nomination. It cinches the fact that he will not be elected President even if he is nominated, which is very unlikely. Perry’s doing Perry, which is in your face, I’ll do what I want to do and you can’t stop me. The fact is he usually gets stopped.

Go read the 1st Amendment in its entirity. Neither you nor any governmental body can stop Gov. Perry, as a citizen of this nation, from freely exercising his religious rights as protected by the Constitution. If you don’t like what he’s doing on Aug. 6th, tough. Go amuse yourself some other way. It’s that simple.

Too bad these people don’t actually know what they are talking about. I don’t expect Jews to be supportive of a Christian initiative, but they should at least know that the prayer event is “non-denominational, apolitical” since it is plainly stated on the website referenced in your article. No one who wants to attend will be excluded or made to feel unwelcome. Christians and Jews all pray to the same God, after all.

I could claim that Perry is is a black man and be as accurate as calling this non-denominational and apolitical. Although they have been backtracking steadily, and making the references more subtle, untill they were called on it, they made it very clear that this was a gathering for Christians to pray in Jesus’ Name, and everyone was welcome to come pray in Jesus’ name. It is not uncommon for evangelicals to refer to thier services as “non-denominational” while excluding any sect that is not evangelical Christian in the term.

I wonder that Rick would say if Reliant Stadium was holding a Muslim or Jewish prayer meeting? Relax folks, it’s all just political theatre. I wouldn’t be suprised if he announces his run for the presidency amid the prayers.

It’s worth noting that many local religious leaders oppose Perry’s official involvement in the event becuase of its exclusivity, its assault on Jefferson’s wall of separation between church and state and its funding by a discriminatory group. Are these leaders anti-christian? Certainly not!

This is the guy that wanted to break away from the UNITED STATES, now he wants to be President. So much for his definition of UNITED. This is the same guy that made $2.68 million from his private busines and he donated less than 1% to the church and now he wants to use the Church as his platform to run for President. This is what America needs another Texas Cowboy “clone” of W Bush since it went so well the last time.

Help me out here. The ADL uses a religious facility to expound on the dangers of
mixing religion and politics for political purposes against and individual who is using his First amendment rights to express his own personal religious beliefs in a public forum among people who express a love for God?

So when a Democrat candidate on the campaign trail goes to a predominantly black church that sits well with the ADL?

Oh, would someone please tell me the established religion of the United States?

How is life under that rock?
@misplacedyankee:
Unlike Obama, who went to church on his time, and never used the White House to send people to pray with Rev. Wright, (not really hard to see the difference if you open your eyes), Perry declared this a State event. He has the right to go pray and even take out a full page ad promoting it on his time and his dime, but he used the office of Governor to make it an act of State. The event, if you have not bothered to notice, is part of a campaign by the AFA who is trying to rewrite history to establish Christianity as an Offical Religion of the Nation. By aligning himself officially and conspicuously as Governor to lead the State in prayer to Christ, it becomes pretty clear that he is not just going to church here.

@William
Most religions of the world are not monotheistic to the point where praying to “God” does not exclude them. A family of religions, such as Abrahamic (Judhism, Christianity, Islam) is still an exclusive religion for them, even if the majority of the planet follows one of these faiths. Freedom of Religion, which requires Freedom from Government Religion is not a matter of majority.

This is not hard. The problem is not prayer. The problem is not religion. The problem is not even religious people in government. If you keep focusing your response at the non-issue, you will keep missing the point. NO GOVERNMENT RELIGION.

If Perry was not out to start a fight and rile up the support of the very croud that openly and publicly wants to end secular government, which is what protects ALL of our religious freedom, he simply had to tell people he thought they should pray, and left government out of it. He did not. He, in fact, made a point of writing up a declaration challenging the very notion of Church State separation and made it an official State Proclamation, clearly invoking that his idea of God was the Universal notion of God for all to pray to to be recognized by the government.

From the President of the United States
2011 NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER PROCLAMATION
Throughout our history, Americans have turned to prayer for strength, inspiration, and solidarity. Prayer has played an important role in the American story and in shaping our Nation’s leaders. President Abraham Lincoln once said, “I have been driven many times upon my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go… It is thus fitting that, from the earliest years of our country’s history, Congress and Presidents have set aside days to recognize the role prayer has played in so many definitive moments in our history… The Congress, by Public Law 100-307, as amended, has called on the President to issue each year a proclamation designating the first Thursday in May as a “National Day of Prayer.”
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim May 5, 2011, as a National Day of Prayer…
BARACK OBAMA

The current president is required by law to make that proclamation every year. His unwillingness to fight it is not proof that a)he does not know it is problematic or b) he, like Perry, chose to pick a fight.

There was no win to remind the public that Freedom includes people who are not like you on an issue so minor and small as a generic proclamation. That is completely different from Picking a fight by alligning yourself with a group that constantly lobbies to establish Christianity as the State Religion, and embelishing the call to prayer with pseudo-history that there is no separation of church and state capped by the phrase “official recognition”.

Perry is once again doing things to promote Perry. This is called courting. He is courting the Christian right for a run for Presidency. Perry always does whats good for Perry. And he gives less than 2% to charity……I cry wolf.

You know our forefathers spent at least 3 hours in prayer before meetings. Also our goverment in 1782 printed 200 or 2000 bibles forgot the number for public schools.. interesting,

No blurring between lines, if you disagree dont go. Prayer works regardless the beliefs of any religion. So seriously people take a chill pill. It is not my right to govern morals that is the persons job. But if I believe in a God to help us, then let me pray and if you dont like it then dont go. Before these specialist speak, really look into the REAL background of our country. It is a freedom of religion, regardless of who you are and what you believe. I am sure more then one religion will be represented?

Okay, I just finished reading the small print in the 1st Amendment and I don’t seem to find that part where Freedom OF Religion applies to everyone EXCEPT elected officials. Are we to now believe that in when an individual becomes a “public official” that they give up their individual protections under the constitution? If so, where does that “all men created equal” thing come in. Perry’s foes are aligned on three fronts: those who are against anything religions, especially of God and Christ are involved; those who are against anyone using their Freedom OF Religion rights; and those who are simply against anything Perry does. Even the Chron has a horse in this race, otherwise it would not have highlighted “cost” in the headlines only to find out that the only “cost” is the security service which is with the governor regardless. An you know how experts are…history is a compilation of bias writing that generates a consensus view of events. Taking one or two quotes from Jefferson and Madison are like, well (sorry Perry-hating-atheists) taking a single scripture from the Bible and quoting it as THE FINAL SOLUTION. Everyone thinks that the constitution says “wall of separation of church and state” but it does not. Jefferson said that and he said it in the context that the federal government would neither establish a religion or oppose religions. That’s a far cry from what the writer of this story and our expert of the day would have you believe. Another example is Madison, while opposed to using public funds to pay the House chaplain whose position to this day opens every session of Congress with a prayer, issued a proclamation in July 1812 stating in part, “I do therefore recommend the third Thursday in August next, as a convenient day to be set apart for the devout purposes of rendering to the Sovereign of the Universe and the Benefactor of mankind, the public homage due to his holy attributes; of acknowledging the transgressions which might justly provoke the manifestations of His divine displeasures; of seeking His merciful forgiveness, His assistance in the great duties of repentance and amendment…” Madison hardly sounds like the aggressive anti-God person at any price that our expert of the day would have us believe. Don’t like prayer? Don’t pray.

You have to leave your brain turned on as you read. The Constitution was not written like a modern contract, with seventeed pages to say “you can’t back out without paying a fine”, it was brief because they assumed you would not ignore the obvious. NOBODY whith any wit is saying that Rick Perry gave up his freedom of religion when he entered office. Only people trying to ignore and obfuscate what it does say claim that this is the problem, and the 1st Amendment is not the only place where Separation of Church and State shows up, and Rick Perry is doing his best with this event to violate it, too.

Let me give you an easy analogy so that you can see how easy this is: If you work for a help desk answering a phone, and you use each call as an opportunity to talk about coca-cola, your boss is not infringing on your right to love coca-cola and spread the word if he says “no coca-cola talk on company time” or “our company cannot promote coca-cola, so when you are representing the company, leave the coke out of it.” You can still have a coca-cola poster in your cubicle and when you leave work you can go to all of the coca-cola rallys you want, and invite your friends.

Get it?

The second violation of Separation is from Article 6: “No test of Religion shall ever be required for any office..” Rick Perry intentionally violated this in spirit by publicly, as Governor, calling on all elected officials to come stand with the Christians in prayer to Jesus to show that they had the right faith as leaders, clearly with the intention of highlighting who was not of the faith.

Pure drivel, both the story and many of these ludicrous comments. I can cite dozens of writings from the nation’s founders that contradict everything this so-called 1st Amendment “scholar” said. While those who created the framework for our form of government were very wary about a government imposed religion, ala the Church of England at the time, they were also quite explicit about allowing the “free exercise thereof” without governmental interference. Unfortunately, mush headed judges conveniently forget this admonition when ruling on religious-based cases. The history of the founders couldn’t be more clear and this scholar, and the story, is flat out wrong.

Then please do so, but don’t simply repeat that they were men of faith or believed that faith was essential to a strong nation. NONE of that is relevant next to the fact that IT WAS NOT TO BE A FUNCTION OF GOVERNMENT to promote religion. Find any significant writing that they felt that religion as an ACT OF GOVERNMENT was not intended to discouraged by the Constitution. That is what counts. Unlike Perry and the folks in the AFA, the founders were not confused about the difference between actions on behalf of government and actions on behalf of the individual. You get no argument (except from a couple of mindless cheerleaders) that Perry can be religious while in office, or even that he is not allowed to suggest that people pray. The problem is that officlally under the authority of the Governor he declared that the day was a State Day to Fast and Pray in official recognition our dependance on Jesus Christ. That crosses the line for anyone who bothers to think about it.

I went to Furlow’s presentation for clergy yesterday morning. An excellent presentation demolishing the theocratic imaginings of David Barton.

Don’t forget that the American Family Association and David Barton are very clear that the public prayer they want is for Christians only. When a Hindu prayer was offered in the Senate, they organized a protest, and said explicitly that the Christian God was the only one who should be invoked in governmental settings. Several individuals were arrested when they acted on the Barton/AFA instigation.

The issue here is that Perry is using the power of his office to call for and support not a generic invitation, as presidents do, but a specific gathering of fundamentalist theocrats. His job as governor is to be the governor for all Texans. Let him go to church on his own, as a private citizen. Let the churches (and synagogues and temples and mosques) take care of their job.

Perry has never been known for his conservative principles before this. This is a cynical attempt to curry favor with fundamentalists. Sadly, it is working.

It’s good to see a politician standing for something positive. This country has always done better with Christians at the lead. Stand for what you believe in Gov Perry, most Texans are Bible believing Christians and we support you. Unfortunately it is usually the liberals and lost souls who get heard from the most.

I don’t think that the Romans have much going on these days.
Oh, I guess you mean the Skeptics of the Renaissance after that one faith had us in the Dark Ages that started when they burned the Library at Alexandria.

There are many that think Perry is coming in for too much criticism. Hold on to your hats, this is just the tip of the iceberg, the surface has not been scratched. He will have to lie in the bed he has made. For too many it is liberal spin to criticize a conservative but accurate to criticize a liberal. He has done it to himself by organizing this silliness. It is not about religion but about creating a wedge. He is saying that if you don’t support him you can’t possibly be a christian. Hooey!

(Matthew 6:5-6) And when you pray don`t be like the hypocrites, For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Assuredly I say to you, they have their reward, But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your father who is in the secret place: and your father who sees in secret will reward you openly.

Just remember Perry’s nonsense when it’s time to vote again — especially when he thinks he should run for president.
.
We need some more competent than Perry, a president who will abide by the constitution, strengthen America (not apologize for it) AND protect our borders. Obozo ain’t cutting it.
.
I never thought I’d say this, but Hilary Clinton is actually looking better for the job. Never liked her until she doubled-up her little fist and punch Bill in the eye for all of his lying about Monica Lewinsky.

Get over it! Gov. Perry is holding a non-government public function, “no taxpayer dollars are being used”. As a citizen under the Bill of Rights freedom of assembly is allowed. Gov. Perry is not in the US Congress and is not asking the US Congress to make a law to establish a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Our Constitution is not beligerent to religion, just the opposite it allows freedom of “All” not “from” religion. The Church of England or no other denomination or religion has been defined as the US national religion; as addressed in the first amendment. Let those that worship God, participate in the lawful event in an atmosphere of “peace and quiet” and go find a pervert to persecute. Get over it! God Bless Texas

I received a call with a pre-recorded message of Perry introducing himself as the Gov of TX and inviting me to National Prayer Day. His office denies being behind it and so did a representative of the National Day of Prayer Organization. Someone is funding it and with Perry’s voice, I can only assume it’s connected to him. I’m thinking his Campaign office, him personally, his church? Or someone is not being truthful. I am open to any other ideas you may have.

Sorry you can’t get off the calling list. Send the Governor a letter requesting the identification of the calling effort funding party. In this matter, they may be proud to standup and identify themselves inviting you to a day of prayer and fasting. Let us know when the letter is sent and when you get the reply. Thank You and God Bless Texas

Facts have a liberal bias. Just keep repeating that Perry did not intentionally start the fight by using his office challenge the idea that ther could be a separation of Church and State and declare that this event was an act of the State of Texas. Assume that all of the links to the offical State of Texas proclamation and the (now only cached) web pages that specifically call this an event for Christians to pray to Jesus that Perry officially recognized as the main event in the government document.

As long as you repeat the denial, it must be true. Don’t bother with those liberal facts.

you can cite the founding father’s various writings all day long, but at the end of the day, they won’t be found anywhere in the constitution… the establishment clause of the second amendment is very clear: CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW… perry’s rally hardly constitutes the establishment of a national religion… “no law” means for or against, meaning congress should but out altogether… as an atheist, i can assure you that i have no problem with seeing a cross at a memorial, the ten commandments posted in a courtroom or a nativity scene displayed at city hall…

we’re raising a nation a nincompoops who, with the help of the ACLU, believe they are constitutionally protected from being offended…

I’m a Christian, I don’t like Rick Perry at all, I’ll be praying that day allright – praying that there is no way he would be elected to any other office! He’s using the day of prayer to help his presidential run — I have a real problem with that. Lord Help us ALL!!!

Many of the Founding Fathers were Deists and didn’t believe Jesus was the Son of God or that God communicated with Man at all.

Although in the 13 Colonies you had to be PROTESTANT to run for public Office; the Constitution Ended that practice.

Public Display of Religion is frowned up on by Real Christians. But Fundamentalists like most Hypocrites Ignore parts of the Bible and Constitution they don’t particularly like. All That, “Look at me; I’m holier than you.” is pure False Prophecy.

Rick Perry should be free to promote his personal beliefs like any other politician. Somehow, it is OK to promote gay marriage, racial preferences for jobs, abortion, and amnesty for illegal aliens. But boy, don’t do anything related to Chritianity.

Is Perry or the republican party or any political lobby/campaign receiving a “speaking/appearance fee” from this? Wheres’s the investigating reporters, oh all the news media just passes things along, because its cheaper than having reporters.

All you have to do is google David Furlow and you’ll see he is a liberal hack. The entire purpose of this supposed outrage of Perry is because liberals are afraid Perry is going to run for president. You wouldnt hear a word about if that werent the case.

I received a call with a pre-recorded message of Perry introducing himself as the Gov of TX and inviting me to National Prayer Day. I called Perry’s office to scold for the solicitation and to request to be taken off the list. The gal I spoke to said his office didn’t initiate the recording or calls and offered up the National Day of Prayer Organization might be funding this little telephone campaign. I then emailed the NDP organization to be taken off the list and the email response I received from a representative of the organization denied they had anything to do with it. So who is funding this activity and WHY DOESN’T THE GOV’S OFFICE KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT?? Very concerning that a politician’s office doesn’t know what’s going on at least and at worst, is not being truthful about it.

I was chit chatting with God last night. He told me to tell dimwitliberals the following: Conservatives are taking all houses in 2012! The liberal reign of terror ends soon! It’s nice to have connections in high places!

Rick Perry has the right to go to any prayer rally he wants. He has the right to worship any god he wants: whether it’s God, Jesus, Allah, Zeus, Ra, Vishnu, Satan, or whoever. It is not OK for him to use his official capacity as governor of Texas to promote his Christian religion, and this prayer rally. He’s also not allowed to use the tax dollars of Texas taxpayers to run the website promoting this religious AND political event and make all those robocalls he’s been making trying to convince Texans to come to it. If he’s as pious as he claims to be, he can go into the seminary and become a preacher.

In supporting this action Furlow bring up examples that mention “Government of the United States of America.” The State of Texas is not the federal government and the Governor is not a member of the federal government. Nor are the private organizations and individuals sponsoring this event. Moreover the 1st amendment states “Congress shall not.” The State of Texas and the Governor are not members of Congress. So in no way has Mr. Furlow addressed the facts at hand.

So after the “evil”. “unconstitutional” horrible event, will we be treated to a story a day about the aftermath? Is this really a story or is the Chron just trying to grow legs on nothing? If it were not so predictable I would be amazed.

Kate you should be called the “anti-religion” writer for the comical. If you took the time to actually read the letter the Baptist sent Jefferson and his actual reply then you would know what he meant. Simply stated so even liberals can understand, the federal govt should make no laws either establishing a national religion or restricting the free exercise of anyone to worship as they please. Three days after writing this letter Jefferson spent a day of worship and prayer in the largest congregation in the US held in the US capitol. Clearly Jefferson would not hold it against Rick Perry for attending a prayer meeting. Only those with closed minds or no mind at all would object, since liberal have no brains, guess they are free to object.

For craps and giggles, let’s say our president was Muslim and sent out invitation to attend a Muslim day of prayer using Whitehouse stationary. How long would it take to call for his impeachment? Same thing…

Hear, Hear! The point is very clear, that if it were any other group, such as Muslim, Buddhist, Jewish or Catholic, there would indeed be calls for impeachment, for trying to “establish” religion into the Government. Governor Perry’s spin handlers lost it when it was chosen to be an Evangelical Christian ONLY event, yet if they kept it open to all faiths, this controversy would not be happening.

That is why there is, as Thomas Jefferson put it, a wall of separation between Church and State. This is a republic (read as representative) democracy, not a Theocracy, and the Founding Fathers knew that it needed to be that way, and incorporated it into the Constitution as the First Amendment.

Interestingly enough, not only would our founding fathers have issue with Gov Goodhair’s use of his office and it’s trappings and support to endorse Christianity, but Jesus would have as well… Mathew 6:5….
“And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.”
King James translation…

palin a phony , pretend she knows about being president along with hannity, beck,o’rielly,rowe and rush(pig)limbaugh they know how to make money. racism pay’s well ask them. now they can just hire there inbreed cousin from norway fox would have all the talking head’s it need to make a phony new’s story. it’s obama’s fault.

Yep, the last time the Republicans controlled the White House most of us seniors lost our Retirement Programs! Most who didn’t lost between 30% and 40% of their retirement moneys with no way to recover, like those who actually own stocks. Those people were able to deduct their losses through their Income Tax. No the Markets are in a downward spiral again because the Republicans refuse to compromise with the Democrats. So here we go again. By the way, here in Texas Rick Perry, the longest serving Governor of Texas, had a deficit of 27 Billion dollars, and the Texas Teachers are having to make up his losses! Teachers recieving either same pay, or salries reduced at the will of the Superintendents. Teachers furloughed for up to 7 days, NO PAY, in order to put money back into the losses for the Republican controlled Texas Congress. Most Republican states all have the same problems as does Rick….too much of the Bush ideas.

Read “The 5000 Year Leap.” The ignorant lawyer who wrote the piece Kate bases her column on is frankly unaware both of the history of the Constitution and the intent of the framers. Shame on her for repeating this drivel.

Rather than debate church and state, you may want to actually pay attention to whom Rick Perry is attaching himself.

Do you know anything about Seven Mountains dominionism? If you’re Catholic, do you know what John Hagee thinks of you and your Church? Do you know about Hagee saying God sent Hitler to “do God’s work” and be a “hunter” of Jews? Do you know about the AFA leadership demanding that all immigrants be required to convert to Christianity? Were you aware the AFA leadership has also said that Native Americans are “morally disqualified” from living in America because they didn’t convert to Christianity? Are you aware that C. Peter Wagner and his followers believe they are prophets and apostles on par with Christ himself and have advocated burning Catholic, Mormon and non-Christian religious objects? Did you know that self-proclaimed “apostle” John Benefiel claims the Statue of Liberty is a “demonic idol” and that homosexuality is a plot cooked up by the Illuminati to control the world’s population? Did you know that Alice Smith advocates “spiritual housecleaning” because demons “sneak into” homes through everyday objects? Did you know that Pastor Stephen Broden advocates violent overthrow of the U.S. government?

These are just a few of the prominant figures Perry has chosen to align himself with on August 6th. He even personally invited Hagee. Religious freedom? The people leading this effort do NOT believe in religious freedom – they believe in tyranny and theocracy.

The so-called first amendment arguments against Perry or any elected official participating in public religious ceremony is based on either ignorance of the law or cynical bigotry.
GW,
I do not even like Hagee, but you are a liar.

Ms. Shellnut, Your opening article sentence says, “The Founding Fathers wouldn’t have been fans of Gov. Rick Perry’s official involvement with a Christian day of prayer, according to a presentation by First Amendment scholar David Furlow.”
Ask your Mr. David Furlow if the prayer opening every session of Congress also falls in this category.
Also, praying to God is not a religion, it is a relationship.
Those who write incorrect articles should find this relationship.